Pendakwa Raya v KALAICELVAM A/L PERASSAMI

ba-45a-68-04-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 21 April 2025 • BA-45A-68-04/2022 • 38 min read
20 cases cited (0 SG, 20 foreign)

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Parties (2)

Case Significance

A trafficking conviction under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 addressing the adequacy of an Alcontara notice (naming "Robert" without particulars) and imposing a life sentence expressed as thirty years' imprisonment from arrest.

This High Court (Shah Alam) decision sets out the grounds of a conviction and sentence in a dangerous-drugs trafficking prosecution. The charge alleged that on 19 August 2021, at a location in the Kajang district of Selangor, the accused had trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 65.6 grams of methamphetamine, an offence under seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952), punishable under seksyen 39B(2) of the same Act. The accused claimed trial.

At the close of the prosecution case on 4 December 2024 the court held that the prosecution had established a prima facie case and called on the accused to enter a defence. The accused elected to give sworn evidence from the witness box and was the only defence witness. A specific procedural issue the court addressed was whether the accused's defence of naming a person called "Robert", without any further information such as a residential address or place of work, was sufficient to amount to the giving of an Alcontara notice — that is, adequate particulars of a third party said to be responsible, so as to enable the prosecution to investigate.

At the close of the defence case on 22 April 2025 the court found the accused guilty and convicted the accused on the charge. In mitigation it was said that this was the accused's first offence, and personal circumstances were advanced. The prosecution stressed that a conviction under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 carries the gravest penalties, that the public interest outweighs personal factors, and that a deterrent sentence was warranted given the seriousness of drug trafficking. After considering the mitigation, the court imposed a sentence of imprisonment for life, expressed as thirty years, from the date of arrest, illustrating the sentencing approach to a proven trafficking offence following the abolition of the mandatory death penalty.

What was the Alcontara-notice issue?

Whether the accused's defence of naming an individual called "Robert", with no address or place of work, gave sufficient particulars to constitute an Alcontara notice enabling the prosecution to investigate the alleged third party.

What sentence was imposed?

After conviction for trafficking 65.6 grams of methamphetamine under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, the court imposed imprisonment for life, expressed as thirty years, from the date of arrest.

Statutes Cited

Cases Cited (20)

MY (20)
[1963] 1 MLJ 263 [1963] MLJ 263 [1966] 2 MLJ 195 [1981] 1 MLJ 64 [1989] 2 MLJ 110 [2002] 4 MLJ 13 [2003] 1 CLJ 734 [2003] 2 CLJ 65 [2004] 4 CLJ 551 [2004] 4 MLJ 489 [2004] 6 AMR 189 [2005] 1 CLJ 85 [2005] 2 MLJ 301 [2006] 1 CLJ 457 [2006] 2 CLJ 129 [2008] 2 MLJ 241 [2010] 4 CLJ 150 [2013] 6 CLJ 945 [2015] 2 CLJ 145 [2022] 2 CLJ 546

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-45a-68-04-2022)